Reposted from Climate Audit.
William Brune, who acted as a “consultant” to the Penn State Inquiry Committee will be discussing the Mann misconduct “inquiry” in Boulder tomorrow Wednesday, October 5, 2:15 PM (Refreshments at 2:00 PM) at the David Skaggs Research Center, Room 2A305. Directions http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/about/visiting.html
The seminar is a Chemical Science Division seminar entitled “Climategate, Michael Mann, and Penn State’s investigation”:
*********************************************************************
Please note: this special seminar will precede the usual CSD seminar.
There will be a 15 minute break in between the two.
*********************************************************************
The release of emails purloined from the Climate Research Unit at East
Anglia University inflamed the passion and politics that surround climate science. As one of the climate scientists whose emails were released, Professor Michael Mann, who I recruited to Penn State, became a focal point of this passion in the United States.
Intense pressure was put on Penn State to investigate Professor Mann, initiating a process that led to his exoneration eight months later. As Professor Mann’s department head, I was a participant in Penn State’s investigative process. At David Fahey’s request, I will tell what I can about Climategate, Michael Mann, and Penn State’s investigation.
Brune was a consultant to the first stage – the (preliminary) inquiry (report); the second stage report is here.
Some of the findings of the inquiry flew in the face of facts known to thousands – see tagged CA posts here.
Clive Crook elegantly summarized the Penn State process at Atlantic Monthly saying that the reports in which Brune participated would be “difficult to parody”:
The Penn State inquiry exonerating Michael Mann — the paleoclimatologist who came up with “the hockey stick” — would be difficult to parody.
Crook continues:
the report then says, in effect, that Mann is a distinguished scholar, a successful raiser of research funding, a man admired by his peers — so any allegation of academic impropriety must be false.
You think I exaggerate?
This level of success in proposing research, and obtaining funding to conduct it, clearly places Dr. Mann among the most respected scientists in his field. Such success would not have been possible had he not met or exceeded the highest standards of his profession for proposing research…
Had Dr. Mann’s conduct of his research been outside the range of accepted practices, it would have been impossible for him to receive so many awards and recognitions, which typically involve intense scrutiny from scientists who may or may not agree with his scientific conclusions…
Clearly, Dr. Mann’s reporting of his research has been successful and judged to be outstanding by his peers. This would have been impossible had his activities in reporting his work been outside of accepted practices in his field.
If any readers have an opportunity to attend this seminar, reports would be welcome.
Video especially.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I intend to attend, and could provide a quick report afterwards.
@Michael Irwin. Earl Allen
If you can, take a cellphone and snap photos and tweets/email, thanks!
Off topic ish, but this latest statement by NSIDC is absolutely Wrong and Untruthful
“Summer 2011: Arctic sea ice near record lows
The summer sea ice melt season has ended in the Arctic. Arctic sea ice extent reached its low for the year, the second lowest in the satellite record, on September 9. The minimum extent was only slightly above 2007, the record low year”
No No NO. It is actually the second lowest year since 1979 which is totally insignificant in the age of the Earth.
Holy Sh…………! I wish i could attend, but I’m about to revert to Kurd Status. What amazes me the seemingly obvious allusion to (Shall I paraphrase) Mann’s ability to attract pal review and all of its accoutrements. Talk about blindered! “This would have been impossible had his activities in reporting his work been outside of accepted practices in his field” Oh really? I’d love to ask a few questions!
Suppose he’ll take questions? I sure hope there are a few informed skeptics in attendance.
With all due respect, I wouldn’t walk across the street to listen to Brune. (What might one expect to hear from the guy who hired Mann?)
The Alice-in-Wonderland text of the conclusions reached by the Penn State “inquiry” was more than I could stomach. The fix was in from the beginning of that pathetic whitewash. It’s a shame that Brune (and the others who “investigated” Mann) are too biased by their own self-interest to understand the severe damage they’ve done to the reputation of Penn State.
“With all due respect, I wouldn’t walk across the street to listen to Brune. (What might one expect to hear from the guy who hired Mann?)
The Alice-in-Wonderland text of the conclusions reached by the Penn State “inquiry” was more than I could stomach. The fix was in from the beginning of that pathetic whitewash. It’s a shame that Brune (and the others who “investigated” Mann) are too biased by their own self-interest to understand the severe damage they’ve done to the reputation of Penn State.”
Agreed, which is why I’m wondering if he’ll take meaningful questions. If not, it will just be another nauseating spectacle, a la the recent Gore-a-thon. I couldn’t watch a single second of that…
http://www.met.psu.edu/people/whb2
What did he see in Mann to bring him to Penn State?
By Brune’s reasoning I suppose it would have been impossible for Bernie Madoff to have committed any wrong doing? By his logic i suppose his inquiry into Mr. Madoff and Ponzi schemes would conclude the following…….
Yes, of course, that sounds about right!
If I could attend, I would. But I doubt I’d be able to sit silently and listen to this guy speak … I’d probably get thrown out for asking to many questions or for pointing out too many discomforting facts.
By Brune’s reasoning I suppose it would have been impossible for Bernie Madoff to have committed any wrong doing?
This level of success in attracting investors, and obtaining funding to conduct it, clearly places Bernie Madoff among the most respected fund managers in his field. Such success would not have been possible had he not met or exceeded the highest standards of his profession for investing peoples money….
Had Bernie Madoff’s conduct of his research been outside the range of accepted practices, it would have been impossible for him to receive so much respect and recognition, which typically involve intense scrutiny from the SEC who may or may not agree with his investment practices…
Clearly, Bernie Madoff’s reporting of his holdings has been successful and judged to be outstanding by the SEC. This would have been impossible had his activities in reporting his work been outside of accepted practices in his field.
so like find someone that has no opinion to collect the data …surley someone has a better camera than a phone that could set up and push record ….peace
Wonder what’s been stirred
In that boiling Brune kettle.
Tiljander tea leaves?
===============
I predict this will soon be “closed to the public” or some other method will be implemented to keep out inconvenient questions.
W. Earl Allen says:
October 4, 2011 at 2:10 pm
I intend to attend, and could provide a quick report afterwards.
—————-
W. Earl Allen,
If you are allowed only one question then what would it be?
A suggested DRAFT question (I am sure this can be refined), “The transcripts and all supporting documents of the stage of inquiries that you were involved in were considered confidential and not released, is this in the spirit of open science, especially open climate science?”
Again, that was an off-the-cuff question that I am sure can be improved upon.
If you were allowed a second question then . . . .
John
I’m intrigued that some folks here, without actually coming out and saying
it, seem to consider Mike Mann’s work on the “Hockey Stick” solution to be
nothing more than part of the foundation and probably the corner stone of
what’s turned into a giant, camouflaged scientific Ponzi scheme.
Those emails from Mann’s time at the University of Virginia are still just
hanging there, like a girl whose petticoats we’d like to count and get a peek
at what’s underneath.
Mann’s friends like William Brune of Penn State seem horrified that the
crowd outside the Team’s clique might get a glimpse of stocking,
The Climategate emails were just a tease…
And I am sure Mr. Brune is not doing this for free… another one profiteering from giving talks about a non-problem.
Here’s one for Mr B, hot off the Bishophill Press.
Another review of Montford’s “Hockey Stick Illusion” has been published – this time in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Here’s a couple of clips they put together.
Clip 1:
“The book provides a fascinating and engaging level of detail, which brings scientific, statistical and even political procedures vividly to life, a feature which elevates this book into an important source of historical insight”
Clip 2:
“This book is an impressive and important work, one that could be an eye-opener for students of statistics, but also an inspiration for them as they see the power of careful and conscientious attention to detail in pursuing complex data analyses… But more importantly, in the near future, the book should be an eye-opener for politicians, and an encouragement for them to insist on thorough and independent investigation of claims published in scientific journals when these are used to underpin extremely important policy decisions.”
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2011/10/4/another-review.html#comments
I await with pleasure the response of the above Mr B at Colorado almost as much as that from the worthies at RealClimate!
I encourage everyone to read the emails themselves and not simply repeat what they’ve heard on this subject. It’s part of the practice of being skeptical. You can view the emails with or without comments at this website:
http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/
Reading the emails before attending a relevant talk would be most enlightening.
I intend to be there.
The proselytism of the Good Word of Mann never ends… LOL
Getting into the Boulder labs for a seminar can sometimes be a bit tricky. Once I waited at the guard gate for 45 minutes to get clearance, and by the time I did the talk was half over, so I left. Here’s some info from the ESRL web site:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/seminars/
The Visitors Center and entrance to the Boulder Department of Commerce facilities are located on Broadway at Rayleigh Road. All seminar attendees, including pedestrians and bike riders, are required to check in at the Visitors Center at the Security Checkpoint to receive a visitor badge. Seminar attendees need to present a valid photo ID and mention the seminar title or the speaker’s name to obtain a visitor badge. If security personnel asks for a point of contact please list Ru-Shan Gao (x5431), Mary Gutierrez (x3429), or Jeanne Waters (x3134). If you are a foreign national without permanent residency, please contact Ru-Shan Gao or Owen Cooper so security can be notified in advance.
As for me, I’m not sure I can get to Boulder tomorrow.
If William Brune were to criticise Michael Mann to the extent that he should, William Brune would be bringing himself down. Each one of these duffers has to prop up the other or else their power-pyramid collapses.
Madoff is an apt analogy for these hucksters. In 2009, I told a number of warmistas that CAGW would be exposed sooner or later, much like those financial cdo’s.
Hey, folks, I *can’t* make it tomorrow, but I’d be very very interested in talking to you about it, probably for PJM. You can contact me at chasrmartin AT gmail in the usual TLD.
In the Ivory Tower it is a game of scratching each other’s back. Especially since they sit on each other’s granting committees. Schmooze or lose.